<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="E93-1046">
  <Title>Ambiguity resolution in a reductionistic parser *</Title>
  <Section position="11" start_page="401" end_page="402" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
6 Conclusion
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> It seems to us that it is the nature of the grammar rules, rather than the amount of the ambiguity itself, that determines the hardness of ambiguity resolution. It is quite easy to write a grammar that is extremely hard to apply even for simple sentence with a small amount of ambiguity. Therefore parsing problems that come up from using more or less incomplete grammars do not necessarily tell us about parsing text with a comprehensive grammar. Parsing problems due to ambiguity seem to dissolve if we have access to a more expressive grammatical representation; witness our experiences with morphological disambiguation using the two approaches discussed above.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> We do not need to hesitate to use features that we consider useful in our grammatical description.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> The amount of ambiguity itself is not what enables or disables parsing. More important is that we have an effective grammar and parser that interact with each other in a sensible way, i.e. we should not try to kill mosquitos with artillery or to move mountains  with a spoon. The ambiguity that is introduced has Lo be relevant for the grammar, not unmotivaLed or structurally unresolvable ambiguity, but ambiguity that provides us with information we need to resolve other ambiguities.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>